Fertility Preservation Decisional Turning Points for Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer: Exploring Alignment and Divergence by Race and Ethnicity

Fertility Preservation in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer: A Case-Based Review

Adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology patients are unique in many aspects of their care; fertility preservation (FP) is one of the most complex to address. In addition to the newly diagnosed AYA patient, there are growing numbers of AYA survivors of childhood cancer who present with concerns about their fertility. Emerging independence, emotional and intellectual growth, and development of an adult mindset are hallmarks of the AYA population; these transitions heighten the intrinsic medical, social, and financial challenges of a cancer diagnosis. FP is extraordinarily important in AYA oncology and can be addressed in many ways: experimental options as well as standard of care, with key differences on the basis of pubertal development, cancer diagnosis, and urgency of cancer-directed therapy. Options exist both at diagnosis and throughout the survivorship journey. It is imperative that oncologists recognize the challenges in this age group, as well as opportunities to pursue FP. The field has evolved significantly in the past 25 years and will continue to evolve as we incorporate more immune-based and targeted therapies into our treatment regimens. This case-based review will explore opportunities to preserve fertility in this unique patient population.

Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Experiences in Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review of the Literature on Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs) with Cancer

With better survival rates for patients diagnosed with cancer, more attention has been focused on future risks, like fertility decline due to gonadotoxic treatment. In this regard, the emphasis during counselling regarding possible preservation options is often on the treatment itself, meaning that the medical and emotional needs of patients regarding counselling, treatment, and future fertility are often overlooked. This review focuses on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient experiences regarding fertility preservation (FP)-among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. A systematic review of the literature, with a systematic search of online databases, was performed, resulting in 61 selected articles. A quality assessment was performed by a mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT). Based on this search, three important topics emerged: initiating discussion about the risk of fertility decline, acknowledging the importance of future fertility, and recognizing the need for more verbal and written patient-specific information. In addition, patients value follow-up care and the opportunity to rediscuss FP and their concerns about future fertility and use of stored material. A clear FP healthcare pathway can prevent delays in receiving a referral to a fertility specialist to discuss FP options and initiating FP treatment. This patient-centered approach will optimize FP experiences and help to establish a process to achieve long-term follow up after FP treatment.

Clinicians' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to sperm banking in adolescent males with cancer: a mixed-methods study

PURPOSE

To examine processes, barriers, and facilitators to sperm banking counseling and decision-making for adolescent males newly diagnosed with cancer from the perspective of clinicians who completed Oncofertility communication training. We also identify opportunities for improvement to inform future interventions and implementation.

METHODS

A survey (N=104) and subsequent focus groups (N=15) were conducted with non-physician clinicians practicing in pediatric oncology who completed Oncofertility communication training.

RESULTS

Most survey participants were confident in communicating about the impact of cancer on fertility (n=87, 83.7%) and fertility preservation options (n=80, 76.9%). Most participants reported never/rarely using a sperm banking decision tool (n=70, 67.3%), although 98.1% (n=102) said a decision tool with a family-centered approach would be beneficial. Primary themes in the subsequent focus groups included variable processes/workflows (inconsistent approaches to consult initiation; involvement of adolescents, caregivers, and various clinician types; assessment of puberty/sexual experience), structural and psychosocial barriers (cost and logistics, developmental, cultural, clinical acuity/prognosis), and facilitators (educational materials, alternative options for banking). Opportunities and strategies for improvement (including fertility preservation in existing research protocols; additional staffing/resources; oncologist education and buy-in; and development of decision tools) were informed by challenges identified in the other themes.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to adolescent sperm banking remain, even among clinicians who have completed Oncofertility training. Although training is one factor necessary to facilitate banking, structural and psychosocial barriers persist. Given the complexities of offering sperm banking to pediatric populations, continued efforts are needed to mitigate structural barriers and develop strategies to facilitate decision-making before childhood cancer treatment.